i just would like to spread the truth about Randomness. how it can be used to reduces variances and also PROLONG WINNING STREAKS.

ANY IDEAS OR COMMENTS WELCOME.

will have short comments about it on a regular basis, but I will try my best to explain that IT REALLY CAN BE A BENEFIT TO ANY SYSTEMS PLAYED. AND CAN TURN A LOSING METHOD INTO A WINNING ONE, NO MATTER WHAT.

we dont need the spins of the wheel to make us win. WE HAVE OUR OWN PERSONAL STATUS. OUR OWN SPINS.OUR OWN ODDS WE CAN PLAY ANYTIME, ANYWHERE. casinos are just there to paid us what we bet. ODDS DONT DO ANYTHING BUT GIVE YOU A MESUREMENT AND TO TELL US WHERE WE ARE ON THE STAIRWAY, the ladder of how far we are.Randomness can be your friend. to be continued....

here is the fact; ODDS ALWAYS HAVE EXISTED, LONG BEFORE THE CASINOS OPEN. so what am I saying ?the casinos want you to beleive that ONLY WHEN YOU PLAY THEIR GAMES YOU ARE PLAYING ODDS.

there is great misunderstanding about what people believe when they think they are DUE FOR SOME TO HAPPEN.just because a even did not happen for lets said 20 spins. lets said you did not win 2 even bets in a row.so you take notes of it, another 10 spins go by and still, no 2 in a row. now you are choosing to bet the 2 in a row event.well, some will jump up and said; that is Gambler's fallacy! dont matter what happend before. just because it did not happen in the last 20 spins, you cant said it will !! ect...

IT IS NOT BECAUSE IT DID NOT HAPPEN PREVIOUSLY THAT I THINK IT WILL HAPPEN NOW. IT IS BECAUSE THE ODDS DICTATE THAT IT SHOULD HAPPEN NOW. BIG DIFFERENCE. IT IS NOT GAMBLER'S FALLACY AT ALL.ODDS DICTATE VARIANCES AND FLUCTUATIONS. THAT IS WHY YOU DONT SEE 30 REDS IN A ROW BUT ONCE IN A BLUE MOON.

randomness affect the law of equal distribution greatly. i know some of you know that. and you know it because you have seen ACTUAL DATA TO SUPPORT IT. JUST AS I DID.moving away after a full cycle of 38 spins on one number's play will GREATLY REDUCE THE LOSING STREAKS. and the same goes with any types of bets. I randomly played even bets, trying to create the best I could state of random events, saw that streaks of 9,10 losses in a row were greatly reduced. same with street betting.

data of 4 cycles with a single street, (48 spins) really do not happens that often when you move from your street after losing 12 spins. I then compared what happens when you dont move, and saw a difference in the losses.I looked at thousands of series. saw it with actual facts. I would not just raise my own opinion without getting the facts first. I am not here for the "glory of just impressing anybody).this can help any system players.CREATING INTERRUPTIONS BETWEEN SERIES CREATE MORE WINS.if it really did not matter at all to players, why would any one want to stop a session after the "reaching of a particular win". why not keep on playing a few more spins? if it really does not matter, why doing it?

I will tell you why; BECAUSE YOUR SUBCONCIOUS GAMBLER INSTINCT TELLS YOU ,YOU WILL GO DOWN IN YOUR LUCK IF YOU DONT.so even to those who think it is just one longgg game, most dont believe it. and they are right not to.

instincts from players know more then they think. even the old saying" stop while you are ahead" is so true.yes you will pick up the next time you start a new session. but get that;YOU WILL NOT PICK UP WHERE YOU LEFT OUT. you know why?lets said you play a single number from the time it came out; so number 11 just showed up.you start playing it until it hit or not. you will be playing it from A FULL CYCLE START all the way to 38 spins if it does not come.now if you just jump in anytime, not right after 11 showed up, YOU WILL BE PLAYING IT MID/SKIP, IN OTHER WORDS NOT A FULL CYCLE FROM THE TIME IT CAME.

that may clear things up a little in the anderstanding of what randomness does for you.MOVING AROUND YOUR PLAYS WHEN THEY DONT COME, OR WAIT FOR MORE SPINS WILL ADD TO YOUR GAMES GREATLY. hope that was not too confusing. i just wish someone would of told me that long ago.would of save me big $$$.God bless,Rinad

For these who search " randomness" in roulette.... It doesn't exist on non random wheel. Random wheels are very difficult to find. I found 1 up till now, even so it had bias on numbers, just major defects wasn't present. What non random wheel does is canning.... rumbers/ streets. .ets will have runs from time to time. It's much better to go with the flow then egainst it. Means if something hits nicely, by all means enjoy the ride. Make sure you do not chase previous results when something else starts to hit. To know what is hitting in the moment and why , advantage play is your best friend.

someone ask me once, do you know what randomness look like?to be honest i had to pause and think for a moment. later on i had a explanation for a different question;

I know what non-randomness look like; it does not look like;

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRBRRRRRRRRRRRRBRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRBBRRRRRRBRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.HOPE YOU ARE HAVING AS MUCH FUN AS i DO,LOL.

so there are patterns that randomness created by odds look like. it does not mean it is easy predictable, but it actually can be learn as a second or third language. that I believe. a player can train himself to learn it. like a language it takes years, sorry, roseta stone lied to you.

patterns are created from odds, space, and the phisical element you are using to play.example; a 6 deck shoe reveals different patterns then a single deck. longer streaks because you have 6 same card denomination x 13. instead of 4 same card denomination x 13.if we had a roulette wheel with 6 of each numbers in the wheel, you would have more variance. you could see a number repeating 4 times much more often then you see right now. 6,8 consecutive numbers could happend.

what is possible

okay ,you come to a table and bet black. 400 spins later you lose 10 blacks in a row. it happens around that many spins on a regular basis. what you wont see probably in your life time is this; 30 losing blacks in a row playing that wheel.

now here is the cream on the cake; WHAT IS POSSIBLE; READY

YOU LOSE 10 BLACKS IN A ROW, MOVE TO ANOTHER TABLE AND LOSE ANOTHER 10 BLACKS IN A ROW, AND THEN MOVE TO ANOTHER TABLE AND LOSE AGAIN 10 BLACKS IN A ROW. OUPS, THERE IT IS.

THE PERFECT STORM. THE TRIFECTA . THAT WILL HAPPEND BECAUSE OF THE "MOVING TO ANOTHER WHEEL FACTOR". YOU CAN LOSE 30 IN A ROW BECAUSE THE POSSIBILITY EXIST. if losing 10 in a row happend around every 500 spins,lets said. it is not so much of a miracle that it could happen at the exact time that you play the other table with your bets.the odds are 500x500x500= you see the impossible becomes very possible when you move. variances increasing tremendously.I have seat down and lose 10 in a row right of way at a blackjack table. you know what i did before i went to play the table? I played a video blackjack machine and lost 10 hands in a row. so thinking I would be smart and go high stakes and play the table, big mistake, and I lost another 10 hands.i SERIOUSLY DOUBT IT THAT i WOULD OF LOST 20 IN A ROW IF I DID NOT MOVE. JUST LIKE IN ROULETTE , POINT IS WHAT IS POSSIBLE BY ADDING AND STRATCHING CERTAIN ELEMENTS IN A GAME.

YOU CAN USE THAT KNOWLEDGE TO PRESS A BET FOR WINNING STREAKS IF YOU GET WHAT i AM SHARING HERE.

In following the general theme of this thread (variance and randomness), I present the following graphic...

These are the results of a recent run I made with RX. The sample size was (what I might consider) quite significant (100,000 spins), which would equate to roughly a little over 83 days of continuous roulette play. Some might say "that's a pretty good result for 100K spins. What's your system?"

In this crazy world of roulette statistics and maths, things may not always be as they seem. People might be somewhat deflated when I answer that this is not really a "system" by their definition of one. This was merely a look into raw variance. The zeroes were eliminated, and I used a single even chance (non-changing) bet all the way through. I simply placed a 1 unit chip on red, and let it fly. I wanted a pure 50% chance bet without any other influences such as the house take.

You are looking variance straight in the face. The red-black (and both of the other) even chance statistics were right in line - well within 1 standard deviation.

There were some interesting observations. I expected the bankroll line to waver above and below the start line in roughly equal distances, depths, and occurrences. This was not the case. After some initial domination by black (through about 7000 spins), the bankroll line broke through and remained in red "plus" territory clear through to the end. I attributed this phenomenon to statistical "skew". Skew, by definition, is... " a measure of the asymmetry of the probability distribution of a real-valued random variable about its mean." In short - I interpret this as "the variance of variance" (as if we didn't have enough to worry about - LOL). The graph clearly shows a dominant positive red skew. There was little parity between red and black. Of course one need only flip the chart over vertically and change the chart color backgrounds, to see the inverse result.... the negative skew upon black.

Black made several valiant attempts to pierce the "red wall" but never could quite do it (at least in this sample).

This wasn't really a quantitative thing for me, it was more about the "behavior" of variance. It could open some new vistas in my way of thinking - which I can't really define right now...it may be some fodder for future study.

I would be curious to see the same experiment, same spins with the other ec's ?/?can you write a system if simple enough like a 1,2,4,8,16,32 positive progression over and over ?amazingly nice to see the whole picture. if you added a 0, how different would it be ?

Those who are interested in graphs may care to have a look at" neo4j" who are well up in the use of graphs. I don't know anything about them other than as a commercial company there may be a charge for further details.

Hi Scar...My first impression is that there are 2 variances - if you will. The first one, which I call the "primary variance" occurs over shorter intervals, and tends to be more volatile. In the case of red/black...they constantly battle for domination. The second one - "secondary variance" or "skew". Skew shows that although the battle continues over short periods of time, either red/black will become dominate through a longer series runs... in the overall net balance. I suppose it was folly for me to presume that red and black would waver about the mean, in a tight fashion over the long haul. One color will likely hold in profit - and the other a net loss, yet both will remain within standard deviation. This was an unexpected little revelation for me.

As how to exploit it....I'm recalling the point that John Patrick hammers time and time again in nearly all of his videos...."In gambling - trends dominate."

Of course, as I mentioned, this was done without zeroes. It will be interesting to see what effect that their introduction might have on variance and/or skew. My guess is that the same red-black battle continues with or without the zeroes.

The wait for a skew determination might not be practical, as this might require many, many spins to flesh out. The focus would probably have to be on the shorter or perhaps middle term.

It would be cool to get Bayes' take an all of this. Maybe he'll pop in soon.

What would be really cool, if you guys start to use elementary probability instead. This game is about numbers. In every spin some number win. It happens to be red or black. Unfortunately red or black has both good and bad numbers. Why not look best 18 numbers vs worst 18 numbers? And why 18? If good numbers are less then 18 ? Or more then 18? What happens then? Correct qwestions produce correct answers. Whatever qwestions produce whatever answers. Let's continue look black/ red, or someone has any better idea? You yourself understand that you yourself have no wish to study implementation of this whatever idea. That's why you are interested if Bayes or whoever else will do it for you, because you do not want to loose your precious time on idea you do not believe yourself, aren't you? I hope that Bayes do understand it either.

there is something that I have always noticed in all games. when I played blackjack and would scout great tables, I knew that even the worst players would still win no matter what. these games sometime made you feel like you were a great player, and maybe you were, but let me tell you that if you ever encountered a strong dealer, or a dealer bias table, no matter how good you are you get your ass kicked. end of the story.when you took seminar to get into real estate and made a lot of money buying and selling, you thought you were a great business man, the king of the hill. easy money. easy money to borrowed, easy to buy great deals and easy to resale. yesss.2008 shows up, no more money to borrow, cant resale anything anymore, big players lost a lot. what is my point? where am I going with that? there is a direction that the market is going, when you know it, winning is easy.same with roulette. when you pick the right side, easy money. the wrong side, very hard to win.

the ocean and its current can take you places you can not fight, even if you are a great swimmer. if you follow it to where it is taking you.... you catch my drift.when we play a method or a specific betting system, and we find ourselves in most difficult situations, or the simple bet you are making is so hard to win. you have been at it for a while, just think for a second. what if I would just start betting the opposite? in many cases there is a strond tide in the game that you can surf with instead of against.

I know some will said; well, it can change as soon as I get on the other side.my answer is; give it time. if you give it time when you were betting on black and were losing 8/10 units, mostly it did not happend in 10 spins. the same goes here. even if you begin losing when you switch side, dont give up just yet, please give it more time. if it is a strong trend, a under current taking your money, the chances are it will stay and be there for a while.I know it is not cookie cutter type stuff, but dont be stuburn and stay doing what you are doing. market trends can last a long time, and it can be a great oportunity.like choosing to follow the last 2 dozens. if you find yourself be on the wrong side for many spins, you are experiencing a strong bias so switch, even if your next few spins will lose. hang in there and watch what will happen. I have lived my entire life playing different games and seen the experience I just described, and am sure many of you have as well. something to think about when you have the option to "make the switch"

You clearly do not comprehend randomness.Random is not predictable, as it's random. Claiming otherwise is an oxymoron.

Randomness has no limits, other than than the sample size observed. (Example: you can't observed ten reds if you only watch nine spins.)It does not form predictable patterns that you can exploit in roulette because the house payoff is always short of what the odds say are fair.